The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1887-12-08

other articles manufactured from the WOOL
they sell at tariff prices, and thus, as
the consumers must return their share OF
this increased price to the tradesman, l
think it may be fairly assumed that
large proportion of the sheep owned by
the farmers throughout the country are
found in small flocks, numbering from
20 to so. The duty on the grade of
IMPORTED WOOL
which these sheep yield is 10 cents each
per pound, if of the value of 80 cents or
than 80 cents. If the estimate of pounds
be allowed for each fleece, the
duty thereon would be 60 or
~ cents, and this may be taken
as the utmost enhancement of its
price to the farmer. BY reason of
this duty $18 would thus represent the
increased price of wool from % sheep,
and $50 that from the wool of 81 sheep;
and, at present values, this addition would
amount to about one third of its price
upon its sale. The farmer receives this,
or q less tariff profit. The wool leaves
his hands charged with precisely that
sum, which, in all its changes, will adhere
to it until it reaches the consumer when
manufactured into cloth and other
goods and material for use.
It's cost is not only increased to the extent
of the farmers tariff profit, but further
sum has been added for the benefit of the
manufacturer and the operation of other
tariff laws. In the meantime the day ar
rives when the farmer finds it necessary
to purchase wooden goods to clothe him
self and family for the winter. When he
faces the tradesman for that purpose he
discovers that he is obliged not only to
return in the way of the increased
tariff profit on the wool he
sold and which then, perhaps,
lies before him in manufactured form
but he must add considerable sum there
for to meet further increase in cost
caused by tariff duty on the manufac-
ture. Thus, in the end, he is
AROUSED TO THE FACT
that he mas paid upon moderate pur-
chase, as a result of the tariff scheme
which, when he had sold his wool, seemed
SO profitable an increase in price-more
than sufficient to sweep away all the tariff
profit he received upon the wool he pro-
duced and sold. When the number of
farmers engaged in wool raising is COM
pared with all the farmers in the country,
and the small proportion t.ey bear to our
population is cOnsidered; when it is made
apparent that, in the case of large part
of those who own sheep, the benefit of the
present tariff on wool is illusory, and
above all, when it must be conceded that
the increase of the cost of living, caused
by such tariff, becomes burden upon
those with moderate means, and the poor,
the employed and unemployed, the sick
and we'll and the young and old, and that
it constitutes tax, which, with relent-
less grasp, is fastened upon the
clothing of every man, woman and child
in the land, reasons are suggested why
the removal or reduction of this duty
should be included in revision of the
tariff laws. Speaking of the increased
cost to the consumer of our home manu-
features, resulting from duty laid upon
imported articles of the same description
the fact is not overlooked that COMPETE
ton among our domestic producers some.
times has the effect of keeping the price
of their products below the highest limit
allowed by such duty, but it is noto-
rious that competition is Otter
strangled by combinations quite
prevalent at this time, and frequently
called trusts, which have for their objects
the regulation of the supply made and
sold by members of the competition
The people can hardly hope for any con
sideration in the operation of these
SELFISH SCHEMES.
If, however, in the absence of such com
bination, healthy and free combination
reduces the price of any particular dutia
BILE article of home production below tn,
limit which it might otherwise reach unde
our tariff laws, and, if with such reduced
price, manufacturers continue to thrive
it is entirely evident that one thing ha
been discovered which should be CAREFUL,
scrutinized in the effort to re-
duce taxation: The necessity o
combination to maintain the prices
of any commodity. The tariff furnishe
proof that some one is willing to accep
lower prices for such commodity, ant
that such prices are remunerative, anC
lower prices produced by competition
proves that same thing. Thus, wher
either of the conditions exist, a case woul
) seem to be presented for an easy splutiol
of taxation.
, The considerations which have beef
presented, touching our tariff laws, ar
intended only to enforce an earnes
recommendation that
THE SURPLUS REVENUES
of the government be prevented by tn
f reduction Of our customs duties, and at tn
same time to emphasize suggestion that
! In accomplishing this purpose, we ma,
discharge double duty to our PEG
= pie by granting to them measure of re
lief from tariff taxation in quarters wher
| it is most needed, and from sources
I, where it can be most fairly and justly &C
corded Nor, can the present action
7 made of such considerations, with an,
) degree of fairness be regarded as evi
dence of unfriendliness toward our manu-
{ featuring interests, or of any lack of ap
/ probation of their value and importance
These interests constitute leading anC
most substantial element of our nationa
greatness, and furnish the proud proof o
, our country's progress. But, if in tht
emergency that presses upon us, GU
manufacturers are asked to surrender
{ something for the public good, and, t.
avert disaster, their patriotism, as we'll
grateful recognition of the advau-
tsges already afforded should LEAF
| than IN epiIIipc, NJ